What the play is about?: More specifically?

Amy Szerlong

 

Although I find it difficult to argue with Geoffrey when it comes to his opinion that the play lacks a climax, I think the play may have a greater significance than the meaninglessness and banality of life.

Throughout the play Vladimir and Estragon continuously debate whether to keep waiting for Godot, or to leave and continue their lives elsewhere. This expresses a tension between a sense of faith and doubt, or life versus death, as more often than not the two characters debate waiting further or taking their own lives. However, in the sense that the play is about faith – it is not necessarily in praise of this virtue. The play continuously discusses, as Geoffrey mentioned, the fact that life merely keeps repeating itself. ["Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful!" (43).] The fact that these gentlemen keep waiting and waiting for a man who is never going to appear, is eventually where the humor lies – since then men are seen as stupid for waiting as long as they have. However, the audience's involvement is such that they find themselves also waiting for Godot, and so consequentially, it is Beckett who has the last laugh on this issue.

Also though, on a similar note, the play also might have to deal with the concept of longing, when observing how the play opens to the audience.

Estragon: Nothing to be done.

Vladimir: I'm beginning to come round to that opinion. All my life I've tried to put it in front of me, saying, Vladimir, be reasonable, you haven't yet tried everything. And I resumed the struggle.

This is a particularly interesting opening to reread once having completed the play, since once it's over the audience realizes the gravity of these opening statements. The audience's involvement with this play is such that the audience also finds themselves waiting for Godot. The audience becomes almost as eager as the two men in their waiting, and it seems that Beckett is trying to make a comment that humanity is more likely to live their lives longing for something to occur rather than go out and make something happen. In the beginning of the first act, Estragon says, "let's don't do anything, it's safer" (13). Doing nothing then, is exactly what these characters do throughout the play, which boldly contradicts Vladimir's opening statement as to why he continues to live. Waiting, though, is an issue he attempts to explain it in the latter half of the second act.

Vladimir: "€¦What are we doing here, that is the question. And we are blessed in this, that we happen to know the answer. Yes, in the immense confusion one thing alone is clear. We are waiting for Godot to come-€¦or for night to fall. We have kept our appointment and that's an end to that. We are not saints, by we have kept our appointment. How many people can boast as much?" (90).

So simply by waiting, they have completed something that makes their lives worth living, although they are still desperate for the appearance of someone who will make their lives better. This is only known through lines near the closing of the play;

Estragon: I can't go on like this.

Vladimir: That's what you think.

Estragon: If we parted? That might be better for us.

Vladimir: We'll hang ourselves tomorrow. Unless Godot comes.

Estragon: And if he comes?

Vladimir: We'll be saved. (109).

Although this section of dialogue appears to be somewhat of a play on words, due to all the spiritual illusions to GODot, the characters think life will improve if Godot comes so they'll continue to wait. But as he has not yet appeared for the entirety of the play it is clear then in the opinion of Beckett, that these men have wasted their lives waiting for something to happen. So, in a similar vein to what has been written by both Alex and Geoffrey, this play is about humans "living" their lives by wasting time doing nothing. It is not that life is meaningless, but more that we lack the sense or knowledge to do something better or more meaningful.

 

Exposition and Forwards: Act IV, Scenes 1 & 2

by Amy Szerlong

Act IV, Scene 1

Exposition:

( Everyone knows both of these)

  • Duke still in disguise
  • Isabella has gone to Angelo and agreed to "see him" in the garden that night (This needs clarification, those characters who know about the proposition know – Duke, Angelo, Isabella – but Angelo does not know he isn’t actually meeting Isabella)

Forwards:

  • Isabella has gone to Angelo and agreed to "see him" in the garden that night (This is also a forward because of the fact that she agrees to meet him in the garden. This ensures darkness so the switch can occur.)
  • Mariana agrees to take part in the switch as long as the "friar" thinks its ok. (Again, this allows the switch to take place and the plan to ruin Angelo to move ahead.)

Act IV, Scene 2

Exposition

  • Duke still dressed like a friar
  • Provost looking for an assistant for the executioner, promises whichever prisoner who agrees their freedom (prisoners know)
  • Pompey agrees to help executioner (prisoner’s know)
  • Angelo sends a message asking for Claudio's head on a platter by 5 (Provost, prison guards and Duke knows)

Forwards

  • Angelo sends a message asking for Claudio's head on a platter by 5 (This confirms the Duke's suspicion that Angelo would still not let Claudio go, even with Isabella following through with her part of the bargain. Also, it raises the stakes for Claudio's survival.)
  • Duke convinces the provost to kill the other prisoner and give HIS head on a platter to Angelo, as Angelo will probably be unable to tell the difference. (This extends the time needed for the Duke to return and pardon Claudio.)
  • The prisoner refuses to be executed. (This throws a wrench in the works€¦)
  • They give the head of a pirate instead. (New solution to an old problem)

Forwards and Exposition: Act III

by Amy Szerlong

Exposition and Forwards: Act III, Scene1

Exposition:

  • Duke still dressed as friar (audience knows)
  • Isabella tells Claudio of Angelo's proposition
  • Duke reveals self and tells Claudio that REGARDLESS of Isabella's actions, Angelo is just exercising his power and influence, he still needs to ready himself for death (says a lot about Angelo as a character, and does not ensure Claudio's fate, though Duke willing to help)*
  • Duke tells Isabella about Mariana and her relationship with Angelo (only Duke and Isabella know)

Forwards:

  • Duke hides and eavesdrops on conversation between Isabella and Claudio (when she tells him of Angelo's proposition – encourages Duke to help them)
  • Duke devises plan to involve Mariana and trick Angelo into sleeping with his former fiancée, restoring Mariana's virtue and ruin Angelo (saves Isabella from humiliation and might save Claudio from death)

*I am a bit confused on whether this would be an exposition or a forward, merely because I'm not sure why the Duke tells Claudio this. Although ultimately we discover that Angelo IS completely untrustworthy and sentences Claudio to death anyway, I am not sure that the Duke asks him to ready himself for death because he just wants to prepare him for the worst (if he can't come up with a plan to save him) or he is going a long with his role as the friar or if he just knows how well Angelo works, and he is revealing to the audience what a hypocritical and mean character Angelo is? Thoughts?

Act III, Scene 2

I am having a problem with this scene because a large portion of the scene seems to be taken up with sexual innuendo and ridiculous accusations. Due to the fact that so many sexual innuendos are made, it's confusing to know whether these accusations are serious and therefore what is exposition and what is a forward – aka what actually matters. Although all of it was written with intent, and it fits in with a play that focuses so largely on (to quote Walter) "sexual tension, sexual frustration, and ethical questions regarding sex" I just am not exactly sure what to pick out and what not to. SO I thought I'd ask the class? Has anyone found any other scenes with Pompey, Elbow, and Lucio that may help the understanding of this scene? What in their previous scenes impacts this scene? Please comment!

Exposition and Forwards – Act II Scenes 3 & 4

by Amy Szerlong

Act II, Scene 3

Exposition: (As categorized by who knows what€¦)

  • Duke is disguised as the friar (only audience knows this)
  • Claudio is to die tomorrow (only some know€¦Juliet actually finds out at the end of this scene)

Forward:

  • Everyone learns that the sex between Juliet and Claudio was consensual, and that they loved each other (This urges the Duke to clear Claudio's name, since this act is not as lecherous as once thought€¦)

Act II, Scene 4

Exposition:

  • Isabella goes to Angelo to plead for her brother's forgiveness (only she, her brother, and disguised duke know)

Forwards:

  • Angelo asks Isabella for her virginity in exchange for her brother's life
  • Isabella rejects Angelo's request; goes to ready her brother for his death

So I feel as though I’m running a bit short on exposition here, especially in scene 4. If anyone has anything I missed in either category, please feel free to comment!

Exposition and Forwards

Posted by Amy Szerlong

Group 3 (Erica, Sam and Amy) met during class period to begin discussing our analysis, and we ended up comparing our notes from Henry IV on these topics to help clarify. Here’s what we came up with as a culmination of handouts, our notes, and examples given in class.

Exposition

  • when/where is it delivered and how?
  • who knows what? who doesn’t?
  • what is it I need to know to move on?
  • what do we NEED to know in order to advance?
  • Example: In Act I Scene II of Henry IV, the audience learns the following: Falstaff is older and a drunkard. Hal foots the bill for his idiot and thieving friends.
  • So, exposition is basic facts about relationships, characters and the environment…

Forwards

  • what makes the play advance?
  • arouses audience interest in things to come
  • causes us to ask questions
  • again, moves play forward
  • Shakespeare dominated by forwards, (good plays and titles are dominated by forwards…)
  • Examples: In Henry IV – Robbery (tricking Falstaff), Mortimer’s plot to go against the king, initial line of play (exposition development…) war = who will win?, Hotspur called in front of king

This is as far as we got today. We are aware that these aren’t the most extensive series of notes, but since none of us have had the opportunity to finish reading Measure for Measure, we disbanded early to squeeze in some extra reading time! Additions are welcome!

Given Circumstances: Religious Environment

by Amy Szerlong

Religious

Although religion is never really discussed in the play, at least in terms of the characters' relationships to a God or other omnipotent power, there is still a strong religious environment that is apparent in the text. The constant theme of "the American Dream" is accompanied by a need for work ethic – a need of individual to make something of him/herself in order to prove his physical worth. Historically, this idea would be called a "Protestant work ethic" due to the fact that Protestants believe that whether they will go to Heaven or Hell is determined by the work that they complete in their lifetime, as opposed to the Catholic belief that iterates that the final destination of each person's spirit is predetermined by God. However, within the world of the play, the connection to the Protestant faith is not really relevant since the characters' drives are not necessarily related to the divine. Instead merely the belief in a work ethic, that hard work will allow one to succeed, is the religion within the play. Characters ultimately live and die by this rule.
The examples of this driving force within the text are prevalent, as Willy's character has a strong focus on success, and is the character who is most driven by this dogma. In the first scene of the play, Linda and Willy are discussing Biff's return home, which upsets Willy. He says, "Not finding yourself at the age of thirty-four is a disgrace!…The trouble is he's lazy goddammit!" The conflict between Willy and Biff only intensifies as the play goes on, but it is mostly centered on the idea that Biff was the member of the family who was going to "make a name for himself" but failed to do so in the prime of his life. When Willy finally learns that Biff never really will succeed (at least in Willy's terms) after the deal with Bill Oliver falls apart, Willy truly hits rock bottom. In his final hours the audience sees his desperation and his limited attempts to leave a legacy behind.

In Willy's final meeting with Charley, he utters a phrase that sums up Willy's devotion to the doctrine of work ethic. "Funny, y'know? After all the highways, and the trains, and the appointments, and the years, you end up worth more dead than alive."  In this statement, Willy sums up what his life was, and how much he has gained for all of that hard work – which is nothing, since he has just borrowed money from Charley to pay his insurance. Finally though, Willy's desperation to fulfill his dream is noted when Biff and Happy leave the restaurant. He says to Stanley the waiter, "Oh, I'd better hurry. I've got to get some seeds. I've got to get some seeds right away. Nothing's planted. I don't have a thing in the ground." By saying this, it points out that Willy feels as is he has left nothing, no imprint on society, which is something he has always dreamed.

Given Circumstances: Political and Social

by Amy Szerlong

Political

Given the time period in which the play is set, it is clear that the United States is in a strong position politically speaking. After the victory of World War II, the U.S. has a great deal of power and influence on the world stage. In the years after the war, Democrat and former Vice President Harry S. Truman is elected president in a historical election in which he narrowly beat Thomas Dewey, Republican.

This election is important in the world of Death of a Salesman based on Willy Loman's moral stance. Willy believes in independent achievement to rise to a position of distinction in the world, success by "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps." These philosophies are considered conservative, or traditionally republican in nature. This is important to realize since the current president is a democrat – signaling that Willy's views are considered "traditional" or possibly "old fashioned."

Social

There are three strong social circumstances in the play, mainly surrounding class, gender, and age.

Class:

As World War II ended so did a time of struggling and saving in order to "help our troops!" There were many initiatives in wartime that kept Americans from buying certain products, or encouraged them to grown their own vegetables and collect cans and bottles to go toward the war effort. Naturally then, in post-war America, there became a strong focus on materialism and wealth. It no longer was about the hard work or the struggle to succeed, but merely the benefits that wealth could afford you. This is completely evident in Death of a Salesman as well, as most of the characters that are considered Willy's peers are defined by what they own.

Most instances of this materialism are exhibited in Willy's discussions with or about Ben, Charley, and Howard. In the flashbacks with Ben, Billy's brother who "was a millionaire by the time he was twenty one" Willy often begs Ben to come and visit again to which Ben replies "I'll stop by on my way back to Africa." In a later scene Willy asks Linda, if she remembers when Ben "gave you a watch fob with a diamond in it?" To which Linda replies, "You pawned it." This is an illustrious description of Ben's class status as he is both able to travel to Africa as well as purchase a gift that had enough value to serve Willy's family.

Howard, Willy's boss, also provides subtle hints to membership in a higher class than Willy. In the beginning of the scene in which Willy goes to see Howard for a new position in the company, most of the scene is taken up by Howard showing off his new voice recorder. While he is playing back the tape, the tape stops to which he says, "The maid kicked the plug out." Clearly Howard has the ability to pay for a maid as well as recently developed piece of technology – while Willy is asking for fifty dollars a week to "get-by."

Charley though has the most vivid examples of his class status based on material goods. In the first scene Charley is in, Willy and Charley are playing cards. Willy asks him if he's seen the ceiling that he's put in, to which Charley replies, "To put up a ceiling is a mystery to me." But ultimately it's Willy talking about Charley that better articulates his class status. While Linda and Willy are discussing what payments need to be made, Willy gets frustrated. "Whoever heard of a Hastings Refrigerator? Charley bought a General Electric it's old and it's still good€¦once in my life I would like to own something outright before it's broken" (77). So although Willy's challenges in being able to pay for some of his purchased items articulates his economic circumstances it is the brands and types of items he actually owns that describe his class status when compared against his peers. In the context of the times, it is clear that everyone's wealth is defined by the items they own – in brand names and actual cost. Willy clearly cannot compete in this area when compared against his peers, putting him in a lower social class.

Gender:

What is most notable about the roles of gender in Death of a Salesman is that it is clear throughout the text that women are treated as second-class citizens. There are also only two types of women seen in the play, those that may be classified as "working girls" and mothers. The "working girls" referred to are those that Biff and Happy go after. While Biff and Happy are talking in the bedroom, Biff says "I'd like to find a girl – steady, somebody with substance" (25). It is clear at the play goes on then, that the girls the boys have been seeing are not the type of girls they bring home to mom. The girls in the restaurant that they pick up during their dinner with their father agree to go with them based on Happy's stellar pick-up line that he sells champagne. Happy then even goes as far to ask, "Do you sell?" which is a not-so subtle double entendre, and even though the girl says no, the fact that he even asks says a lot about him and the girl.

Similar to the women in the restaurant is the woman in Boston from Willy's past. This girl is urging Willy to open the door while they're in a hotel room together, and when Willy finally agrees to get the door, he says the following: "All right, stay in the bathroom here, and don't come out. I think there's a law in Massachusetts about it, so don't come out." There is nothing in the text to prompt the mention of a law, unless Willy is referring to the fact that SHE is against the law in Boston, i.e. is a prostitute.

Contrasting to all of these women is Linda, who is seen as the stereotypical housewife. Many women took jobs during the war to fill positions left by men who were fighting oversees, and although many were "sent back to the kitchen" when the troops returned, it began a chance for women to emerge in the working world. In the text there is no evidence that Linda was one of these women. However considering her family is in a financial struggle, it is interesting that she did not seek work while there was a movement for women to work outside the home. However there is evidence that shows that she is there solely to support Willy and her family, fulfilling her traditional gender role as the capable wife and mother.

Age:

Although this is a social issue that is somewhat easily overlooked in comparison with the other two, there are very strong examples of ageism in this play, mostly in regards to Willy. Toward the end of the play when Willy goes to see Howard and Charley he has two encounters that shows intolerance for the fact that he is aging. The most prominent example of this is in his discussion with Howard who is clearly delaying firing Willy. The reason he is firing Willy is because Howard feels that Willy "needs a good long rest." He asks Willy where his sons are and why can't they support him – even though it's clear that Willy still wants to be able to support himself. He states "I put thirty-four years into this firm, Howard, and now I can't pay my insurance! You can't eat the orange and throw the peel away – a man is not a piece of fruit!" This is probably the strongest example of the discrimination Willy faces due to the fact that he feels discarded. Although there is evidence that Willy has boasted about his accomplishments, Howard doesn't not contest the length of time Willy has worked for the firm, which leads to the conclusion that Willy is one of the oldest members of the company, and though Willy is in a rough state, firing him now still seems extreme.

Then when he goes to see Charley, there is a line that hints at this same issue though it is much more subtle. While he is waiting to see Charley, Willy talks with Bernard, his nephew who is around the age of Biff and Happy. During the discussion, Willy gets fairly emotional and Bernard tries to comfort him by saying, "Take it easy, kid." Although "kid" is used as a term of endearment here, it is a term that is usually used by someone older to someone younger. By Bernard using this term, it does not show much respect for his elder and shows that Bernard views him as child-like or possibly simply incompetent. Although this is a very minor example in comparison to the scene with Howard, the fact that it is used makes it sound like Bernard is talking down to Willy, implying a lack of respect for him.

Religious will be following…later.

The Heroic Heroine: More on Gender within Medea and Others

In modern times, Medea can be interpreted as a play with main ideas in support of feminism and the breaking down of traditional gender roles. But after completing further research, it is clear that the main ideas in Medea are actually rooted in staunch misogyny. Through examination of Euripides's other major works, Hippolytus and Iphigenia in Tauris, greater insight is gained into the misogynistic messages contained within the play.

From studying Euripides's other heroines, it is clear that the female protagonist in Greek drama has a combination of both masculine and feminine traits that would have strongly affected the audience's interpretation of the play during the time in which it was written.  In the eyes of an ancient Athenian audience, Medea possesses the anger, passion, and desire for revenge that male warriors are meant to exhibit, but still maintains the role of successful housewife and loving mother. Her nurse even proclaims Medea's maternal devotion to the audience in one of the first monologues "a refugee who's won respect, admired, stable, domestic – supporting her husband as she should" (lines 10-12). So initially, Medea is painted for the audience as being a character the audience should sympathize with, or merely pity. Most scholars agree that Euripides describes the most "humanized" Medea, who is thought to be the "stereotypically perfect female within the male power structure," her position as a foreigner as well as her marriage to Jason impairs her from representing "Everywoman" (Durham, 55).

In Athens at the time, there was a great sense of nationalism and pride in Athenian citizenship. However since Medea is clearly, as stated, "a refugee," she would have faced a good deal of bias from the audience. The play also concerns the ideas of love and passion, and it would be incorrect to ignore these emotions when analyzing the character of Medea. In her marriage to Jason, she is set apart from typical Athenian wives in the fact that her marriage is based on passion. Wives in Athens would have been given in marriage by their fathers, "passing from the authority of one man to another" (Nimis, 403). This unique feature of her marriage then sets her apart from the position of normal women as well, and also introduces the overall theme of "warning against the consequences of unbridled passion" (Spranger, 4). And it is Medea's actions as a result of said passion that truly sets her apart from her role as a representation of the ideal feminine, and introduces the opposing side of her personality and emotion: the masculine or heroic side.

It is not simply the violent killings of Glauce, Creon, and her two sons that allow Medea to be classified as "masculine" but it is also the intelligence and power she has over men through her speech. Her masculine and feminine traits allow her to relate well to both sexes, and consequently give her a heavier hand in negotiations with both. Classical studies professor, Judith Fletcher, notes that "Medea uses this remarkable ability to co-opt a speech act use to create alliances between men within a civic context in order to dupe and bind her victims for her own personal vendetta" (Fletcher, 33). Examples of this can be found when Medea persuades Creon to let her stay an extra day, which gives her time to ultimately kill him and his daughter. It is also how she is able to persuade Aegeus to shelter her in Athens at the end of the play, in return for remedying his sterility. Consequently, it can be stated then that persuasiveness and speaking ability were considered masculine traits because they were so closely related to intelligence.

However this type of masculinity is not only found in Medea, but also in two other plays by Euripides, Hippolytus and Iphigenia in Tauris. Euripides's play, Hippolytus, follows the story of a character by the same name. Basically, Hippolytus upsets the goddess Aphrodite when he worships the goddess of chastity, Artemis, instead of her. The actions are mostly dictated by a series of oaths that are negotiated by Aphrodite (in an attempt to get back at Hippolytus for his dismissal of her) or other female characters in the play. Professor Fletcher again notes the similarities of the females' commanding tendencies within this script.

"The oath, its performance unseen by the audience has its consequences are unseen by Hippolytus, fulfills the same function in the sequence of speech acts as the blind oath of Aegeus to Medea€¦By letting a woman of servile status gain power over a king's son, Euripides' second version reworks the supplication/oath combination with even more emphasis on the oath's ability to skew the patriarchal power structure" (Fletcher, 37).

Iphigenia in Tauris follows the story of Iphigenia, who is supposed to be a virgin sacrifice to the gods, but instead, escapes. Iphigenia's escape is only made possible through the deception of a male who is bound by a promise made to a female. Although for the most part, these agreements made by males with females seem mostly deceptive and manipulative on behalf of the women, this deception is still attributed to intelligence, again, a masculine trait. Consequently, these tactics which are predominately employed by men are what allow the women in Greek tragedy to be so strong. "It is abundantly clear that when a powerful linguistic instrument, the oath, is exploited by an otherwise disempowered social group, it becomes an effective means of sabotaging the fundamental elements of a male hegemony" (Fletcher, 43). With this idea in mind, it is clear that although Euripides was conveying a strong woman in his writings, it was not meant in a positive light.

What is most interesting though about Euripides heroines is that they were not uncommon in the times of Ancient Greece. In the tale of Lysistrata, written by Aristophanes, the women of Sparta withhold sex from their husbands in order to end the Peloponnesian War. In the play there is an extensive exchange between the women and their husbands, bargaining and negotiating the females' terms. Although the play was written as a comedy, and the dialogue serves for humorous affect, the idea of the play is still based from the strong female character for which the play is titled.

Overall, the central idea of Medea, like most of Euripides's other plays, is one of warning. Medea is portrayed as "the other" to an audience of exclusively male citizens in a male-dominated society. Although initially her feminine traits allow her to be pitied, her masculine traits (which ultimately overpower the men within the play) cause her to be feared. Ultimately she is seen as an enemy of Greek society, the entire Athenian state, as she has easily manipulated men and succeeded with multiple killings. Consequently, the play is highly misogynistic as Euripides prevents his title character from being a hero. Instead he lets the men know what happens when a woman gains power, and that is breaking the gender roles of the society. Not only does this throw any familial normalcy out the window, but it also ruins the patriarchal supremacy, which is clearly seen as a threat.

Sources Cited:

Durham, Carolyn. “Hero or Heroine?” Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies. 8.1. (1984) 54-59.

Fletcher, Judith. “Women and Oaths in Euripides.” Theatre Journal. 55.1. (2003) 30-46.

Nimis, Steven. “Autochthony, Misogyny, and Harmony: Medea.”  Arethusa. 40.3. (2007) 397-420.

Spranger, J.A. “The Attitude of Euripides Towards Love and Marriage.” The Classical Review. 24.1. (1910) 4-5.

Idea: Unjust Gender Roles in Grecian Society

In Medea, an idea that cannot be ignored in the text is that of the gender roles in place in Greek society. By looking directly at the text, one can find numerous instances where the gender roles are stated by the characters, and it is difficult to ignore the main idea that the position of women in Greek society was unjust. For example, in her opening monologue of the play, the nurse tells the audience that Medea is "a refugee who's won respect, admired, stable, domestic – supporting her husband as she should" (line 10-12). Not only is this idea supported by the nurse, but also the chorus of all females who serve as her neighbors who come to support her and sympathize with her as she emotes.

In today's society these ideas are clearly "old fashioned" and can be titled masochistic. In fact, Medea seems the only one with enough foresight to see her own mistreatment. In her first monologue to the audience, the audience hears her worldview that strongly opposes that of the chorus and the nurse.

"What other creatures are bred so exquisitely and purposefully for mistreatment as women are?…Bad enough to have no choice in servitude – try refusing the arrangement, or later petition for divorce – the first is impossible while the second is like admitting you're a whore" (lines 241-250).

This admittance familiarizes today's audience with the adversity and dilemma Medea faces, and it raises the stakes in terms of the plot line. Making the circumstances all the more dire is when the male characters come into the picture, and the converse attitudes are witnessed by the audience.

Jason: "€¦you'd admire what I've done if sex wasn't your obsession. It's folly that women measure their happiness with the pleasures of the bed, but they do. And when the pleasure cools or their man goes missing, all they once lived for turns dark and hateful€¦" (line 575).

This is only one of many instances where Medea is berated for her emotionality and her rage toward Jason by one of the other characters, through statements.  However the actions in the play also work against Medea, and enforce the idea of gender roles. The conflict in the play begins when Jason accepts Creon's offering of his daughter's hand in marriage to Jason. Although Jason states that he is marrying Glauce to better his family, there is no consideration for Medea's wants, needs, or emotions and is simply accused of acting irrationally. However Medea stands against this adversity of course through the killings of Glauce, Creon, and her two sons. The main idea that the treatment of women or position of women in Grecian society is unjust then is supported by the final scene. Throughout the play Zeus's sense of justice is referred to, so when Medea is carried away on a God's chariot it is clear that the Gods thought that her actions were justified.